Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations
Impact in
Classified as
- Authors
- John G. Batsakis
- Journal
- Medical Entomology and Zoology
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w75056331 →Countries where authors are citing Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations
This map shows the geographic impact of Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations
This network shows the impact of Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations.
About Tumors of the head and neck: Clinical and pathological considerations
This paper, published in 1979, received 541 indexed citations . Written by John G. Batsakis covering the research area of Surgery and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Surgery (303 citations), Oncology (176 citations), Oral Surgery (156 citations), Rheumatology (143 citations) and Pathology and Forensic Medicine (108 citations). Published in Medical Entomology and Zoology.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w75056331.